This is the mail archive of the newlib@sourceware.org mailing list for the newlib project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 08 Apr 2016 10:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Apr 7 13:53, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 07 Apr 2016 13:42, Jakub Sejdak wrote: > > > I'm representing Phoenix Systems company. We are developing > > > Phoenix-RTOS for IoT. > > > We use newlib internally with our changes and now we want to make it public. > > > > > > However, basing on the mailing list history, I'm a bit confused with > > > the procedure of sending patches. > > > I guess everything should be send via mail in a form of git diffs. > > > Some people paste it into message, some people attach files. > > > > use `git send-email` to do it the right way. if it's too big, the > > fallback is to use `git format-patch` and compress+attach it. > > > > > Could anyone instruct me how should I do it properly? I have my > > > changes applied to repo cloned with read-only access. > > > Since this will be our first patch, it will be huge (141 new files). > > > Should I generate diff one for all changes or separate diff files for > > > each modified file. > > > > if it's for a new port, a single patch that adds all the new code is > > fine. you might want to break it up across projects -- one for newlib, > > one for libgloss, etc... > > Actually it would be really nice for reviewing to split it also in > as many independent parts as possible. That also simplifies to find > a bug via bisecting. while a general truism, i don't think it matters for new ports as much when you're basically adding a ton of files. you can't really bisect beyond "initial port". -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |